Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

I saw that, Petersen obsession with my is very amusing, it's as if he is stalking me. I notice that he didn't give a reason why everyone piled in on the thread, had he been polite elsewhere the debate would have gone ahead.

On that latest Petersen discussion video, where he mentioned this thread, Petersen implied that I might be a bit obsessed with his blogsite and so forth - I do keep a close eye on it along with other blogs. He seemed to forget that he wrote a blog early this year that was partly about me (it suggested I might be 'bat crazy' though he seems now to accept that I might be sane), whilst not obviously attempting to inform me of the fact - I saw the post at The Question Evolution Project Facebook page I think.

"http://answersforhope.com/a-response-to ... ment-15139A YEC pretending that their opponents don't know what lies are?How ironic since you only need to spend a little time on YEC blogs and websites in order to discover lies (which I have detailed at the BCSE community forum where - unlike here - there is a right of critical reply)."

My response was mainly addressing the Paul Taylor quote in the blog post.

The article by Bowden cited by Petersen - Bowden being a university chemistry professor and Christian - discusses examples where the creation account in Genesis 1 more or less can be made to match what science tells us. Whilst ignoring aspects of Genesis 1 (re-interpreted) that completely fail to tally with science eg the Sun needing to exist before planet Earth. He also uses the phrase "there are, of course, holes in the theory of evolution that are big enough to drive a semi-truck through" but fails to elaborate on this overly dramatic comment.

But he also urges people, in his article, to 'embrace' science.

He's got himself in some hot water with some fellow academics at the university, even though he's certainly not a young Earth creationist. I also found this press article:http://www.worldmag.com/2013/10/iowa_pr ... r_arrogantIn this article quotes from Bowden suggest he has some possible sympathy for 'intelligent design' claims as well as theistic evolution. Note that World Magazine are pro-Christian:http://www.worldmag.com/about.php

I don't have any issues with how Petersen covers the story. Except perhaps that he appears - mostly - to have simply COPIED much of what Klinghoffer wrote and sought to pass it off as his OWN words (that MAY be an oversight rather than a deliberate intention to mislead anyone who does not view the final link).

Yes, Really.

But I don't really dispute what Klinghoffer writes and Petersen echoes.

However, when I flag this post at his blog I am sure that he will STILL censor me for reasons unknown.

To my surprise Jason has allowed me to link to this thread and my comment about his Bowden article (which he has clarified to make clear that much of his post was quoting or summarising David Klinghoffer as in the link supplied).

A YEC finds some dishonest evolutionists - and then pretends that everyone who disagrees with YEC-ism must be dishonest and also cowardly! Who would have thought it! A person from a grouping of Christians who regularly twist science and sometimes add to scripture as well now trying to stereotype critics.

You also fail to consider why many YEC Christians are labelled dishonest by both atheist and theist critics.

I have spent years trying to engage with Answers in Genesis in particular on scientific topics and the Bible - by email or from within their website. But they don't want to know and ignore me, even though some trained scientists work for them. When I provided some info - which Ken Ham was seeking - on their Facebook pages I was immediately censored and banned (silently so that [nobody] else would know). And the list of other YEC blog pages or Facebook pages who have censored and/or banned me is almost as long as my arm. Full details are at the community forum on the BCSE website.

I don't accuse you of attacking me without naming me. But that is my point - you attack some whose behaviour you dislike whilst ignoring other critics. I do not target 'laymen' only.

Speaking my mind.

Oh, and your essay might be more convincing if you backed up with even just one example your empty claim "Since they can’t win the arguments with those who are familiar with science, they go after the lay people who fund the major Creation ministries".

"They are really not familiar with the material that they are reading, nor do they really understand it." Ditto.

By the way, you regularly request debates (though not always about science). Does that mean you are NOT a layman?

Is the (new) Pope a Catholic?The fact that it is biblical to be intolerant of challenges and criticism is convenient cover for the fact that YECs post nonsensical claims which they claim are 'true science' but they also do not tolerate posts by others that demonstrate how particular YEC claims are untrue and sheer wishful thinking.

If Jason disagrees he is free to come here and say so. He won't be censored I suspect.

JasonFriel is a bit of a loudmouth who sometimes spoke over Barker and that video is sheer propaganda ie it contains attempted rebuttals of Barker's words that were not spoken by Friel. And Barker was not googling during the interview - was he?A hostile interview with a laughing audience is rather different from a moderated public debate (something Ken Ham ran away from earlier this year).Go on - CENSOR me again.Ashley

http://answersforhope.com/existential-a ... /#commentsJust looked at this (I did not read the article I just glanced through the seven posts below the article). Only ONE critic's post appears (Chris) - and that is a reminder. Followed by Jason attempted to rebut things Chris apparently wrote.

Yet Jason has posted the following complaint at both The Question Evolution Project and the Atheism on the Slide Facebook pages:"Several days ago, I posted an article that presented an argument that I developed. I have to say, I have had a very strong reaction from unbelievers. My site's traffic has spiked and I am receiving a lot of hateful comments, as well as comments that simply criticize the argument that I presented. Many of the "rebuttals" that have been given to the argument either prove my point, or are self defeating. Many of the objections that have been brought up will be addressed by the four sub arguments that I will be presenting either later this month or in December. I'm currently busy due to my trying to finish up my Columbia Evangelical Seminary writing protocols class. If anyone missed the article, you can find it here: [link] ~Jason".

As usual YECs are telling their likeminded peers what to think WITHOUT bothering to present the full evidence. Why should they do that I wonder?

Me to him:"The on-screen negative commentary that his answers were in effect silly was a distraction but I did not spot anything of note in them (perhaps I need to view it again or maybe you can tell me what I may have missed)";

Him to me:"I have seen many videos by evolutionists that mock creationists such as Dr. Kent Hovind, I am sure that based on my prior experience with you, as well as your behavior, that you wouldn’t object to having those kinds of videos used on Creationists";

Me to him (this has yet to be moderated so you may not get to read it):"I note that you conspicuously have not claimed any ‘killer blow’ arguments from the on-screen propaganda in the Friel video. Perhaps that’s because – when I watched the video again an hour ago – I found that the arguments about eg all mutations are ‘bad’ or ‘no new information’ can ‘ever’ be added to genomes to be UTTERLY FALSE. And your attempt to put words/opinions into my mouth about unspecified anti Kent Hovind videos that I have not even seen smacks of (typical) YEC desperation. I have never made a video about creationism and don’t plan to. YECs like you and Mr Sorensen are condemned by their own words and behaviour. I simply report this on the BCSE community forum or by email. I present ALL the evidence so people can judge for THEMSELVES. Btw I have taken an on-screen photo of this last exchange".

By avoiding such exchanges with me and other critics of YEC-ism, Bob Sorensen shows himself to be a COWARD.

Petersen:"Ashley,The only thing I noted from the video was Dan Barker’s inability to answer the questions in a logically coherent manner. Quite frankly, the answers he gave were quite absurd.I have seen your behavior both via email and on the BCSE forums. It consists of name calling defamation, libel, and stalking. You do not like to see your fellow evolutionists put in a bad light, but you certainly don’t mind putting Creationists in a bad light. Your behavior and your reaction to this video shows your behavior to be hypocritical and inconsistent.I am not condemned by my own words. I have nothing to hide, you just like to claim that I am hiding something. I have openly sent your comments to spam many times. I gave you another chance to be civil and cordial on my website when it looked like you might have had something constructive to add to the conversation. Unfortunately, I was incorrect and you went straight to your usual sort of behavior. As a result, I will be sending all of your further comments to spam, again".

My latest reply to Petersen - which he has promised to send to 'spam' - BEFORE even reading it (thus I reproduce it here where Jason CANNOT censor):"My comments which you sent to 'spam' were NOT spam. Thus your claim to be hiding nothing is false (even if you admit you sent them to spam).And I do not call people eg 'liars' or 'stupid' or 'bigoted' without backing up my claim with EVIDENCE.I DO sometimes criticise evolutionists on the BCSE community forum.I also - unlike some there - discuss SCIENCE on the BCSE community forum. But you run away from scientific discussions - indeed ANY critical discussions under your blog posts.I am NO hypocrite. You cannot prove otherwise or you would have already done so. Who is doing the name-calling NOW, Jason?And - like a spoilt child who cannot win an argument - you resort to censorship. AGAIN. The Answer to Everything (if you are a science-denying and bigoted young Earth creationist claiming to be 'equipping the next generation of apologists' that is)!Your attempts to get rid of me are unlikely to succeed.Ashley"

When he claims I wasn't being 'constructive' he means that I showed him to be WRONG. Das ist verboten!

He is indeed condemned by his own words (I'm not saying he isn't a Christian just that he's a bad Christian).

As is the cowardly Sorensen who will not even speak to me yet frequently libels me on his blog page where there is NO right of reply.